I'm doubting that.. Why wouldn't you want to do that work and make your 2.6 truck better?
2.5 2012
- Thread starter house
- Start date
I'm doubting that.. Why wouldn't you want to do that work and make your 2.6 truck better?
zstroken
For $$$ your name here
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 23,151
LOL, it would be better, and even that much better at it. Why do folks bother to cheat instead of making their truck better within the rules?
Wait for it....
Because they want to win!
They can sell the dual pumps, and air to waters and put that money into making the truck run that much better in the 2.5 or just put the $$$ in the pocket.
RobH
New member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 755
RobH
New member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 755
LOL
Dan, quit talking about me behind my back!
Not sure who's tech equipment FI was planning on being used, but this is a 2.6 cover bought like a month ago from them...plug is 2.6505 with a mic and slips in with ease...
could you explain more? who was this cover bought from? if i understand correctly it was supposed to be 2.6 but failed tech?
zstroken
For $$$ your name here
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 23,151
Where is the undo button? LOL
Fortunately I think most of the guys we pull with are pretty honest. Of course I am pretty naive though also!
jtrawdeal
New member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2010
- Messages
- 292
Which 2 trucks didnt pass tech Josh? Im very curious!
x MadMAX DIESEL
New member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2008
- Messages
- 322
I'd like to know whose also... But I hear you just had to look at it to tell, they had pedistals lol. I do believe one was a p pumped 24v, unless I heard wrong?
Last edited:
2.5 - An opinion
1. is not to be considered an entry level class. There needs to be a "stock" class that serves that purpose, although i would hate to be the tech for "stock" as it will be hard to police. The name "workstock" and the 2.5 class need to have no correlation with one another. there are more dedicated pullers than "street trucks" or "work trucks" in this class, so get over it. what was once ws,2.6,2.8,3.0 now needs to be stock,2.5,2.6 protrusion,3.0.
2. dual pumps or not? doesnt bother me either way. dual pumps would save the top trucks from spending $2,000 a throw on single cp3s if they are shown to be undependable and on the other hand single cp3s would probably prevent dual pumped 2.6 trucks from dropping down and running 2.5. If single pumps shall be the way then i think it needs to be said "single oem model/make fuel pump." lets remember though classes are distinguished by 2.5,2.6, etc. which is the main limiting factor here (air).... so would it be so bad to run dual pumps? IDK
3. duals on non-dual trucks? (this is going to be said to be a biased opinion because i have a short wheelbase truck but im expressing anyways) Level playing field is what everyone wants correct? to level the playing field in this aspect would require a short wheelbase truck to be able to run duals to compensate for the "leverage" issues shorter trucks face. this falls back on the dedicated pullers, if its dedicated then duals on the back dont effect its "use". if someone wants to run their "street truck" in 2.5 their most likely going to trailer it to the pull nehow so put the duals on before the pull and take them off after or face the consequences (if any) of not running them.
4. hanging weights? I could swing either way with this.... this may be another good way to keep 2.6 trucks from dropping to 2.5? on the other hand this would also help level the playing field and thats what we all want isnt it? hanging weights could also allow top 2.5 trucks to bump to 2.6 and do better since it seems 2.6 has low truck numbers this year (everywhere i have been anyhow).
theres going to be atleast a 300hp gap between top 2.5 trucks and top 2.6 trucks with just 2 factors (1. 2.5 straight bore, and 2.6 protrusion 2. no water-air and water-air) this 300hp gap alone would be enough to distinguish the 2 classes. the other factors need to be weighed by opinions and somehow someone somewhere will make a set of rules. 2.5 i believe is here to stay and as a competative puller in this class, i would say a good, FUN class to pull in. I would like to see these rules be adopted by or intermingled with rules from BOB to allow even competition all over IL,IN,KY.
1. is not to be considered an entry level class. There needs to be a "stock" class that serves that purpose, although i would hate to be the tech for "stock" as it will be hard to police. The name "workstock" and the 2.5 class need to have no correlation with one another. there are more dedicated pullers than "street trucks" or "work trucks" in this class, so get over it. what was once ws,2.6,2.8,3.0 now needs to be stock,2.5,2.6 protrusion,3.0.
2. dual pumps or not? doesnt bother me either way. dual pumps would save the top trucks from spending $2,000 a throw on single cp3s if they are shown to be undependable and on the other hand single cp3s would probably prevent dual pumped 2.6 trucks from dropping down and running 2.5. If single pumps shall be the way then i think it needs to be said "single oem model/make fuel pump." lets remember though classes are distinguished by 2.5,2.6, etc. which is the main limiting factor here (air).... so would it be so bad to run dual pumps? IDK
3. duals on non-dual trucks? (this is going to be said to be a biased opinion because i have a short wheelbase truck but im expressing anyways) Level playing field is what everyone wants correct? to level the playing field in this aspect would require a short wheelbase truck to be able to run duals to compensate for the "leverage" issues shorter trucks face. this falls back on the dedicated pullers, if its dedicated then duals on the back dont effect its "use". if someone wants to run their "street truck" in 2.5 their most likely going to trailer it to the pull nehow so put the duals on before the pull and take them off after or face the consequences (if any) of not running them.
4. hanging weights? I could swing either way with this.... this may be another good way to keep 2.6 trucks from dropping to 2.5? on the other hand this would also help level the playing field and thats what we all want isnt it? hanging weights could also allow top 2.5 trucks to bump to 2.6 and do better since it seems 2.6 has low truck numbers this year (everywhere i have been anyhow).
theres going to be atleast a 300hp gap between top 2.5 trucks and top 2.6 trucks with just 2 factors (1. 2.5 straight bore, and 2.6 protrusion 2. no water-air and water-air) this 300hp gap alone would be enough to distinguish the 2 classes. the other factors need to be weighed by opinions and somehow someone somewhere will make a set of rules. 2.5 i believe is here to stay and as a competative puller in this class, i would say a good, FUN class to pull in. I would like to see these rules be adopted by or intermingled with rules from BOB to allow even competition all over IL,IN,KY.
x MadMAX DIESEL
New member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2008
- Messages
- 322
That would be a nice mailbox lol
Turbo trouble
HARD DATA is that the turbos failed tech. an unbiased tech official was given a plug to plug turbos with. he did so. they failed. they were not allowed to run the class they failed tech for. im not saying that anyone was cheating purposely, or that theres not a legible reason why they failed. Im writing this reply because i think the tech did the right thing and i was standing there when the tech recieved an innappropriate phone call from someone within the "Fleece fences". Its too late to post pictures or point fingers, its done and over and im sure if someone was cheating they already covered their ass/asses. We cannot ask for educated techs and then scold them for making educated decisions whether they were right or wrong. Im sure the plug the tech used was rechecked for correct measurements also, and im sure they were correct, so i dont think we should be running down the person/shop that made them. We have a good FUN class going with a good bunch of guys/shops. Lets keep it that way. Besides Brayden, them built motors should be enough to put a whoopin on my poor stock one... no reason for slippin turbos by tech :lolly:
HARD DATA is that the turbos failed tech. an unbiased tech official was given a plug to plug turbos with. he did so. they failed. they were not allowed to run the class they failed tech for. im not saying that anyone was cheating purposely, or that theres not a legible reason why they failed. Im writing this reply because i think the tech did the right thing and i was standing there when the tech recieved an innappropriate phone call from someone within the "Fleece fences". Its too late to post pictures or point fingers, its done and over and im sure if someone was cheating they already covered their ass/asses. We cannot ask for educated techs and then scold them for making educated decisions whether they were right or wrong. Im sure the plug the tech used was rechecked for correct measurements also, and im sure they were correct, so i dont think we should be running down the person/shop that made them. We have a good FUN class going with a good bunch of guys/shops. Lets keep it that way. Besides Brayden, them built motors should be enough to put a whoopin on my poor stock one... no reason for slippin turbos by tech :lolly:
pierce460
Beave Wrangler
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2010
- Messages
- 611
Excellent post......
and while were talking about hard data.....
they teched the top 3 at Franklin.... Dellinger was not in top 3. no FPE trucks were as i recall? I was not there so cannot say for certain
the only truck that i recall being at indy was tuttles and i also recall him telling me you have changed his charger or charger setup since then.
Paris IL was open class w/ no teching. Im pretty sure the Turtle machine cleaned up quite a bit more smoke than previous pulls.... im thinking big.... like 3.4 big?
nothing personal, just wanting to talk about hard data
Lol's aside.. The covers are the same and haven't been changed. There is no need to cover asses.
Chase may have been out of line, but the bottom line is the plug comes out of nowhere and doesn't fit. You can argue that ours are big, his are small, but for turbo's that have been teched all over the place by plugs that are not ours, to get kicked at the only pull they really cared about (hometown) is pretty lame.
If they really were 2.6 chargers or larger they would've put more than 10 feet on Will
:lolly:MarkBroviak
Duramax Guy
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2007
- Messages
- 198
Rod's don't make hp..
Where you going with this? Yeah tuttle wanted to run all out at his hometown pull that had no rules so we threw a 3.0 billet on there. Nothing wrong there..
3.4... haaha.. Justin's JJMachine 3.0 truck only runs a 3.2 clipped charger.
Lol's aside.. The covers are the same and haven't been changed. There is no need to cover asses.
Chase may have been out of line, but the bottom line is the plug comes out of nowhere and doesn't fit. You can argue that ours are big, his are small, but for turbo's that have been teched all over the place by plugs that are not ours, to get kicked at the only pull they really cared about (hometown) is pretty lame.
If they really were 2.6 chargers or larger they would've put more than 10 feet on Will
i believe it was 5ft on Will and 6ft on me.... :ft:
Last edited: